GMO foods are Not the answer to world hunger - They may be a hazard to public health

GMO foods may not be safe and in
fact, they pose an enormous risk of damage to human, animal and
environmental health. I believe that everyone has the right to clean water, uncontaminated food, clean environment and decent shelter. When we are deprived of any of those things, life becomes tricky and even downright depressing, dangerous and life-threatening. If you don't know what genetically modified organism (GMO) foods are, read on, you might be in for a big shock!

The GMO foods industry
claims that producing GMO foods have major advantages for the human race,
but
there are many reasons why the production of GM foods should not be
encouraged. It is beyond the scope of this essay to give a
comprehensive overview of allof those
reasons; however, the most important appear to be that GMO technologies are
facilitating corporate control of the world’s food supply, environmental
degradation, and GMO foods may threaten human health. There are also important social and economic
concerns which need to be investigated and addressed.

GMO foods are not new. In fact, the first commercial GM crop in the
United States (US) was a tomato, and was released in 1994.3 In 1996, the first genetically manipulated,
glyphosate-tolerant soybeans were planted in the US.7 An organism is genetically
modified by taking the genes from one organism and inserting them into another
to produce a genetically modified hybrid, which then acquires new properties.1

Research has found that the new
organisms are not tested for harmful effects to human health and environment,
or for nutritional value, because expression of the introduced genes is the objective.
1

The
main GMO food crops are maize, soybean, canola, sugar beets, and cottonseed
oil. Animals including pigs, cows and
salmon are also genetically engineered.3 Crops such
as Bt corn are engineered to be pest resistant, and others to enable them to survive
lethal doses of herbicide.3
GMO foods have been
marketed by corporate giants as being the path to cheaper food and the solution
to world hunger. GM crops are
created to “tolerate herbicides or to express a pesticide”, and these objectives
do not address the problem feeding the world’s starving people.1

Consumer concern over corporate
control of the world’s food supply through ownership of species and seeds is
strong in the United Kingdom (UK) and Europe.5 In 2009, France’s Supreme Court ruled that Monsanto
made false claims about the environmental safety of its herbicide. By 2003, ten companies controlled 60% of the
world’s food supply.5

These corporations are agglomerates
producing seed, pesticides, and fertilizers, and providing the processing and
shipping of those products. GM crops are
bred to be dependent on high doses of the very chemicals which are produced and
sold by the corporations producing the GM seeds.3

Vandana Shiva, a prominent environmentalist, argues
that the production of genetically modified food in India has cost many people
their livelihoods and their land, and has caused many thousands of farmers in
India to suicide.2

She believes they suicide because
dependence upon corporate seeds increases the farmers’ debts until their land
is repossessed. Shiva also asserts that
the farmers have no choice but to buy these seeds, as corporations and
governments have conspired to ban the use of traditional seeds.2

A
difficulty arises when it comes to substantiating GM industry claims, because
those same companies have the power to suppress independent research, and they
do so when the results do not support their claims.1

Scientists who publish research
that is unfavorable to GM companies are attacked and discredited, and their
results are dismissed.1

Nearly 80% of GM crops worldwide
are sprayed with glyphosate-based herbicide, which is the active ingredient in
“Roundup”.7

It was developed by Monsanto, a
GM giant, and was widely promoted by them as being biodegradable and leaving no
traces in the soil. But because it is a
systemic herbicide, it cannot be removed from sprayed vegetables even when
washed, peeled or processed.7

Widespread poisonings occurred in
Latin America due to aerial spraying of GM crops, causing much harm to human
health. GM crops have the ability to
contaminate non-GM crops, a major environmental concern is the possibility of
GM crops pollinating into the wild, which could have catastrophic effects on
native plants and wildlife, and disrupt the balance of nature.3

Plants modified to be resistant to herbicides,
can cross-pollinate with weeds giving them immunity to herbicides, and
facilitating super-weeds, which then require spraying with other stronger
herbicides.3 Much research documents the harmful impacts
of GM crops on the environment, but this research is quickly discredited in the
US.1
Watts (2009, 3) cites examples of harm to soil and plant health, and
toxicity to beneficial organisms and insects, from the spraying of glyphosate
on GM crops and also warns of glyphosate’s persistence in the soil and the risk
of contamination to groundwater.7

Research studies have found that
glyphosate may accumulate in, and kill human cells, and have mutagenic effects
on the human reproductive system.7 Exposure has
also been linked to various neurological effects, liver damage, DNA damage and a
range of cancers, especially haematological
cancers.7

In the US, the FDA’s scientists
warned of unknown risks and the threat of new allergens and toxins in GMO foods
when they were first released onto the market, but they were overruled.1 The FDA formed new policy, overseen by a
former attorney for Monsanto, that allowed GMO foods to be approved without
testing and labeling.1
Dr Pusztai, a renowned scientist,
was commissioned by the Rowett Institute of Scotland to develop methods for
identification of risks to humans and animals from GMO foods.5 He
found that rats fed with GM potatoes for 100 days, were stunted in growth and
suffered defects to their immune systems, but was widely discredited after
making his findings public.5

It is generally believed that GMO
foods are subject to stringent testing and regulations, but that regulation of
GMO foods is either weak or non-existent in most countries.1 When Monsanto declare that the assurance of
the safety of their GMO foods is the FDA’s task, and the FDA state that
responsibility for food safety belongs to the food producer, it becomes evident
that regulations to protect consumers are inadequate.1

The results of this GM ‘cheap
food’ solution are the indirect and hidden economic costs of pollution,
degradation of human health, damage to soil structure, and environmental
damage, estimated by Professor Jules Pretty to be £2.43 billion per year in the
UK alone.5

The cost of removing pesticides
from drinking water in the UK by 2003 was £120 million per year.5 The
‘cheap food’ solution is producing corporate dominance by a small collective of
companies, and a planned system of GM animals and vegetables being raised for
human consumption in multi-storey complexes; a complete artificial environment.5 Farmers do not necessarily benefit from these
evolving farming techniques. In fact,
according to Levins (2000),
“In 1929, farmers kept 49 cents of every dollar they handled. In 1960, farmers kept just over 1 cent on the
dollar”.4 The giants of agribusiness are non-farm
agglomerates, with enormous investment in farming and farmers. As these are some of the largest corporations
in the United States, they generate enormous profits, while the farmers retain
less and less of their farming income.4

In conclusion, GMO foods are
produced in many parts of the world, and millions of people and animals eat GMO
foods or products containing GMO ingredients.
However, when considering the environmental and agricultural
disadvantages of GM crops, caution is warranted. There is evidence supporting the positive
aspects of GMO foods, and evidence supporting the negative effects, both direct
and indirect. Until more time passes,
and more independently collected data is gathered to assess and verify any
links to unwanted effects, the production and ingestion of GMO foods should be discouraged.

There should also be great resistance to the
idea that private corporations can own and regulate planetary food
security. Indigenous seeds have
traditionally been the product of generations of farming knowledge and
practices; their viability improved with each passing season. GMO foods have little to do with feeding the
world’s hungry and everything to do with corporate greed.6 Such corporate ownership
constitutes disaster for independent farmers, genetic diversity in agricultural
and wild environments, and threatens human health, our social and economic
systems, and ultimately the resilience of the human race.

Sources
and References:

1
Antoniou,
Michael, Claire Robinson, and John Fagan. 2012. “GMO Myths and Truths: An Evidence-Based
Examination of the claims made for the safety and efficacy of genetically
modified crops.” Earth Open Source.